Abstract:Abstract Humans are capable of integrating social contextual information into decision-making processes to adjust their attitudes towards inequity. This context-dependency emerges both when individual is better off (i.e. advantageous inequity) and worse off (i.e. disadvantageous inequity) than others. It is not clear however, whether the context-dependent processing of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity rely on dissociable or shared neural mechanisms. Here, by combining an interpersonal interactive game that gave rise to interpersonal guilt and different versions of the dictator games that enabled us to characterize individual weights on aversion to advantageous and disadvantageous inequity, we investigated the neural mechanisms underlying the two forms of inequity aversion in the interpersonal guilt context. In each round, participants played a dot-estimation task with an anonymous co-player. The co-players received pain stimulation with 50% probability when anyone responded incorrectly. At the end of each round, participants completed a dictator game, which determined payoffs of him/herself and the co-player. Both computational model-based and model-free analyses demonstrated that when inflicting pain upon co-players (i.e., the guilt context), participants cared more about advantageous inequity and became less sensitive to disadvantageous inequity, compared with other social contexts. The contextual effects on two forms of inequity aversion are uncorrelated with each other at the behavioral level. Neuroimaging results revealed that the context-dependent representation of inequity aversion exhibited a spatial gradient in activity within the insula, with anterior parts predominantly involved in the aversion to advantageous inequity and posterior parts predominantly involved in the aversion to disadvantageous inequity. The dissociable mechanisms underlying the two forms of inequity aversion are further supported by the involvement of right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex in advantageous inequity processing, and the involvement of right amygdala and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex in disadvantageous inequity processing. These results extended our understanding of decision-making processes involving inequity and the social functions of inequity aversion.

Inequity aversion and the stability of majority rule

Advantageous Inequity Aversion Does Not Always Exist: the Role of Determining Allocations Modulates Preferences for Advantageous Inequity

Rank Reversal Aversion Inhibits Redistribution Across Societies

Equitable, neutral, and efficient voting rules

Self-interest overrides rank-reversal aversion in resource distribution

Evolution of collective fairness in complex networks through degree-based role assignment

Inequity aversion improves cooperation in intertemporal social dilemmas

Group Incentives and Rational Voting

Equality, equity and incentives: An experiment

Distortion Under Public-Spirited Voting

Spatial gradient in activity within the insula reflects dissociable neural mechanisms underlying context-dependent advantageous and disadvantageous inequity aversion

Most Equitable Voting Rules

Competition between self- and other-regarding preferences in resolving social dilemmas

Neurocomputational evidence that conflicting prosocial motives guide distributive justice

Veto games: Spatial committees under unanimity rule

How Natural Selection Can Create Both Self- and Other-Regarding Preferences, and Networked Minds

Majority voting is not good for heaven or hell, with mirrored performance

Harm Ratio: A Novel and Versatile Fairness Criterion

Predicting Human Behavior Toward Members of Different Social Groups.

Voting Rights, Agenda Control and Information Aggregation